February 23, 1929. The agent drew a steamboat with incorrectly designed
stem paddle wheel (Fig. 77). The percipient’s results are very
interesting (Figs. 77a, 77b, 77c). There is smoke, so labeled, by
itself, then the smoke stack with smoke issuing from it, then the paddle
wheel in the water, its paddles more correctly placed externally to the
rim, then what may mean smoke containing cinders. The cut of the paddle
wheel has left out the axle-end, very distinctly indicated in the
original pencil drawing.
February 17, 1929. The agent drew an Alpine hat with a feather (Fig.
142). Of the shapes drawn by the percipient (Fig. 142a) the one on the
right may very possibly be related to the rim and the band of the hat,
the top left one is very suggestive of the feather, and the bottom one,
though called in the script a “chafing dish,” is very like the hat. All
this suggests that the attention of the agent was directed first to one
part, then to another and another of his drawing.
February 29, 1929. The agent drew a very intricate and unusual cross,
one with eight arms, notched at the ends (see Figs. 7, 7a). The
percipient also drew a circle of notched arms, but seven in number. One
would suppose that when she began she had no idea where the drawing
would end, or it would be more regular.
Through all the experiments of the period covered by the book _Mental
Radio_, and enough more to make 300, there is no other agent drawing
resembling this. And nowhere is there another percipient drawing like
it. Granting that the percipient should make such a drawing once, which
was by no means certain (nothing like it appears among the 564
Guess-drawings reported in this Bulletin), then the chance of its
coinciding in place with the eight-armed cross of the agent would be 1
in 300.
February 17, 1929. The agent drew an open umbrella, with curved handle
(Fig. 122). The percipient wrote, “I feel that it is a snake crawling
out of something—vivid feeling of snake, but it looks like a cat’s
tail.” And in her drawing (Fig. 122a) we have the curved umbrella
handle, but it has sprouted a tongue and an eye; the ellipse of the
umbrella rim is retained but it is a smaller one; otherwise the
“something” is shaped wrongly.
We have cited instances where Mrs. Sinclair proved that she got an
inkling of some drawing in a series before reaching it, by writing down
at the moment her conviction. In _Mental Radio_ our attention is called
to a number of instances of seeming anticipations even where Mrs.
Sinclair was not so conscious of them, or at least did not write down
her expectation that some particular thing was coming. Here is an
instance not mentioned in the book. The next agent’s drawing after the
umbrella _was_ a snake. Had it not been for the dawning consciousness of
_that_ snake, the umbrella handle might not have undergone
metamorphosis.[19]
February ?, 1929. The agent made an American flag, with pole surmounted
by a ball (Fig. 127). The percipient failed to get the stars but she got
the stripes and the pole, and the ball, which last has wandered from its
place, although the neighborhood in which it should be is sensed (Fig.
127a).
March ?, 1929. Mrs. Sinclair wrote “Muley cow with tongue hanging out.”
And this is the drawing her husband had made (Fig. 137). In 260
experiments in guessing, the originals being replicas of Mr. Sinclair’s
drawings on February 15, there was not one success. We would have said
that Mrs. Sinclair had a success in this case had she merely said “Cow.”
But she did better than this, for she got the particular “tongue hanging
out,” which certainly increases the value tenfold. I venture to say that
not one time in twenty will a picture of a cow show her with her tongue
hanging out.
Pursuing the tests past the period until more than 300 have been had, we
find that Mr. Sinclair drew a cow’s head three times. Once the
percipient’s response was technically a failure; it resembled horns, or
rather antlers. The second time she got a chicken’s face, again strictly
a failure, but at least something with animal life. The third time was
the “cow with tongue hanging out.”
And there were three other times that Mrs. Sinclair either drew a cow’s
head or wrote “cow” or “calf.” For the first see Figures 15, 15a. In the
second instance the agent had drawn a face, not that of a cow but of a
man. The third was a brilliant success, not in name but in form. The
agent had drawn what was doubtless intended for a donkey with a harness
band across its neck. In the reproduction the donkey’s long ears were
metamorphosed to resemble horns, and across the cow’s neck is a band,
which the lady interpreted in the following script: “Cow’s head in
stock.”
March 2, 1929. The agent drew six concentric circles (Fig. 144). As in
the case of the balloon (see Figs. 95, 95a), the percipient seemed to
“see” only part of the original. She also draws concentric circles, but
omits about a quarter of each (Fig. 144a).
We can allow space but for one more exhibit, and this because of its
seeming suggestiveness (Figs. 56, 56a). Of course, when we move away
from correspondences in visual form or direct correspondences in idea we
enter a region where the possibilities of chance relation are
considerable. Nevertheless, literature abounds in associations between
fleeing foxes on the one hand and guns and sounding horns on the other.
It seems likely enough, therefore (though I would not bring forward this
case as _proof_), that the sensing of the original drawing found a path
for emergence through association ideas.
There are many more tests described and illustrated in Mr. Sinclair’s
book. What we have given has been, save for a few exceptions, according
to selected and entire groups or series on particular dates.